ITC Failed to Acknowledge Growth Potential of D.R. Imports in Extrusions Case, Exporters Say
Producers led by the U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition argued Oct. 16 that the ITC’s negligibility finding regarding aluminum extrusion exports from the Dominican Republic was only reachable because the ITC edited exporter Kingtom Aluminio’s data (see 2409040045) (U.S. Aluminum Extruders Coalition v. U.S., CIT # 23-00270).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
In their Oct. 16 filing, they said that the ITC had primarily dedicated its brief to defending its discretion to select a reasonable methodology in making negligibility determinations. But “the Commission's methodology is not the issue in this appeal,” they said.
“Instead, the issue is the Commission's determination that no likelihood existed for Dominican imports to exceed the negligibility threshold, when the Commission only reached a finding of negligibility through extensive adjustments and its adjustment methodology had indisputable limitations,” they said.
There is an “obvious potential” that more evidence would arise during the investigation itself due to, for example, “specifically forecasted scope changes or clarifications, higher questionnaire coverage, and/or corrected reporting,” and the ITC’s failure to recognize this makes its determination “arbitrary and capricious,” the producers said.
Again, they said that over-reporting of total aluminum extrusion imports had artificially increased the denominator of he ITC’s negligibility calculation. They also again argued that Dominican imports still have “potential for continued growth.”